TMI Blog1992 (1) TMI 338X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... le alcohol,that is, industrial alcohol, was not diverted and misused as substitute for potable alcohol. This is enough to justify a provision like 58A. In paragraph 88 of the decision it was observed that in respect of industrial alcohol the States were not authorised to impose the impost as they have purported to do in that case but that did not effect any imposition of fee where there were circumstances to establish that there was quid pro quo for the fee nor it will affect any regulatory measure. This completely demolishes the argument on behalf of appellant. Appeal dismissed. - C.A. 503 OF 1974 - - - Dated:- 28-1-1992 - R.M. SAHAI AND S. MOHAN, JJ. JUDGMENT Validity of demand, under Section 58A of the Bombay Prohibition ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... pervision but on demand of cost of maintenance of such personnel. Levy was upheld, by the High Court, as fee under entry 8 of List II of the VIIth Schedule read with entry 66 of the same list. In Synthetics Chemicals Ltd. Ors. v. State of U.P. Ors., [1990] 1 SCC 109 a Constitution Bench after exhaustively reviewing the constitutional entries and various decisions held that industrial alcohol being unfit for human consumption as no levy on it could be made by a State either under Entry 51 or Entry 8 of List II of VIIth Schedule. Nor such levy could be justified on doctrine of privilege or police power. Therefore it was urged that the order of High Court was liable to be set aside and the provision was liable to be struck down as ultra ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sure that non-potable alcohol,that is, industrial alcohol, was not diverted and misused as substitute for potable alcohol. This is enough to justify a provision like 58A. In paragraph 88 of the decision it was observed that in respect of industrial alcohol the States were not authorised to impose the impost as they have purported to do in that case but that did not effect any imposition of fee where there were circumstances to establish that there was quid pro quo for the fee nor it will affect any regulatory measure. This completely demolishes the argument on behalf of appellant. Principle of occupied field precluded State from trenching on any power which was already covered by central legislation. But in absence of any provision in In ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... power to issue licence for production was found to exist in State. Reliance was placed on observations in Synthetic Chemical's case. Since it stands answered by the constitution Bench itself it is unnecessary to dilate on it. Suffice it is to extract the following observation, The position with regard to the control of alcohol industry has undergone material and significant change after the amendement of 1956 to the IDR Act. After the amendment, the State is left with only the following powers to legislate in respect of alcohol: (a).................................... (b) It may lay down regulations to ensure that non-potable alcohol is not diverted and misued as a substitute for potable alcohol. (c)..................... ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
